So, this paper, together with two otherpapers on Roma, and the one on Maronites, is added to my recent enumeration of cases where the pedigree (or germline, or genealogical) mutation rate gives better results than the "evolutionary" rate. Since both analysis of the Y-STR mutation modeland empirical data suggests the superiority of the pedigree rate, it is perplexing why the evolutionary rate continues to persist in the literature.

Getting back to the paper:

Southern parts of present Poland were under Celtic influence. In the second century B.C., the Celts arrived in southern Poland via the Moravia and Bohemia regions, where they prevailed with their La Te`ne culture from the fifth century B.C. Therefore, it is probable that the R1a/R1b proportion varied in those regions according to the degree of influence of one population or another (i.e., Slavic or

Celtic).

I recently suggested a possible Celtic or Germanic link with some R1b subclades, and the presence of both R-U106 and R-U152 clades in Western Slavs (from the Myres et al.) paper suggests that both processes may have been important. It will be interesting to see ancient DNA studies confirm/disprove these hypotheses about an ethnic affiliation of particular Y-chromosome lineages.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.21253

Similarities and Distinctions in Y Chromosome Gene Pool of Western Slavs

Marcin Wozniak et al.

Analysis of Y chromosome Y-STRs has proven to be a useful tool in the field of population genetics, especially in the case of closely related populations. We collected DNA samples from 169 males of Czech origin, 80 males of Slovakian origin, and 142 males dwelling Northern Poland. We performed Y-STR analysis of 12 loci in the samples collected (PowerPlex Y system from Promega) and compared the Y chromosome haplotype frequencies between the populations investigated. Also, we used Y-STR data available from the literature for comparison purposes. We observed significant differences between Y chromosome pools of Czechs and Slovaks compared to other Slavic and European populations. At the same time we were able to point to a specific group of Y-STR haplotypes belonging to an R1a haplogroup that seems to be shared by Slavic populations dwelling in Central Europe. The observed Y chromosome diversity may be explained by taking into consideration archeological and historical data regarding early Slav migrations.

12 comments:

Therefore, it is probable that the R1a/R1b proportion varied in those regions according to the degree of influence of one population or another (i.e., Slavic or Celtic).

While this region, like the adjacent parts of Germany (only partially culturally Celtic, and likely not language-Celtic), clearly had R1a contributions in addition to R1b for millennia, there is zero evidence for Slavic tribes/people in the region during the La Tene iron age. As such, the respective ratio is ages older and not indicative of cultural/language origin until much later, after Slavic expansion.

On the other hand, there seems to be ample evidence that "west Slavic regions" - i.e., originally not Slavic regions with substantial R1a, had their own haplo subgroups, likely before 4,000 years ago.

Germanic and Celtic ethnicities don’t correlate with R1a1 at all. They are mainly R1b-U106 and R1b-U152 people, see:http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/08/r1b-founder-effect-in-central-and.html

All truly Germanic tribes like Saxons, Jutes, Angles and Frisians, which settled in Britain, probably didn’t have R1a1 at all, as in regions of their settlement R1a1 level is below 2% now.http://www.ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/capelli-CB-03.pdf

The same with Germanic Franks and all Celtic tribes in France 0%-3% R1a1.

East Germany on the other hand has been populated by Slavs since the Bronze Age, so we have around 25 % R1a1a there and mostly East European modal haplotypes . Slavic language was spoken there till XVIII century. So we know that R1a1 in Germany is mainly, if not exclusively, of Slavic origin.Recent genetic studies like Underhill 2009 showed that Slavic R1a1a has been present in Central Europe since the Neolithic or Bronze Age. Slavic population there is quite old and homogenous genetically. http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v18/n4/fig_tab/ejhg2009194f2.html#figure-title

Genetic studies show that Slavs originated in Oder-Vistula region and not migrated there from somewhere. Polish population in Poland is therefore, according to those studies, autochthonous. Migrations didn’t affect Central Europe as much as Southern Europe as some people used to think.

The 5th century was just a time of severe cultural crisis in Oder-Vistula region, but there was no population replacement there. Similar cultural crises were observed in other areas of Europe, like for example Britain, and there too population was not replaced and, except regions where there were some Germanic settlements, the population didn’t change much.

Slavs are not mixed with Balts and Fins, who are predominantly N1c, and this hg. has little presence in Poland. Also very little Celtic and Germanic admixture. R1b around 11% in Poland as per Kayser et al. 2005 study:http://www.zgms.cm.umk.pl/prace/428-443.pdf

Most of it in the cities, so we know that it is a recent admixture. A lot of R1b comes from Armenians, Jews and other minorities. I1 is at negligible level and some clades like I1-P are exclusively Polish not present anywhere else.

Ziemowit, this is to speak clear: R1a is Indo-European satem languages, and R1b is centum languages (Italic-Celtic-Germanic ones, which were the same before to split themselves). If R1b has come from East, we don’t understand why it didn’t stop in Eastern Europe. IE languages were spoken then in Western-Central Europe, exactly where they are spoken to-day and as the Alinei’s theory says. Others groups probably split firstly to Balkans (Hittite and after Greek-Armenian and Illyrian-Albanian). The fatherland of IE languages then can have been Central Europe (after the migration from the Italian refugium after the Younger Dryas) and not to-day South Russia.

I pretty much completely disagree with everything you wrote. There are too many things to respond to, but the main issues are:

- you use the term Slavic for early times and northwest places when and where it cannot be defined and/or where there is no such thing documented- what you arbitrary call "truly Germanic" is just northern German- Germanic, a tiny portion of the area Germanic peoples (culturally and language-wise) lived in- R1a is definitely present throughout all of culturally German/Germanic areas for millennia, and millennia before Slavic expansion - including Thuringia and Saxony (Jastorf) and arguably at least parts of the Przeworsk culture (how much of that was East Germanic/ Pre-Goth is admittedly controversial and still hotly debated). R1a1 is documented from Eulau (corded ware) 4600 years ago.

Sure, R1a is originally of eastern origin, and R1b of western (at least at a certain subclade level) - but that distinction goes back to long before IE language splits and before one can talk about either Germanic or Slavic cultures. Central Europe has had this R1b - R1a gradient and I in the middle for a long time (I2b2, R1a1, R1b all in present in Lichtenstein cave, 3,000 years ago).

Slavs originated between the Dnieper, Pripet, and Buh rivers in modern day Ukraine before there spread into many areas of Europe they inhabit today. Part of the proof for this are the river names in this region. This theory has been proposed by Jean Manco in her Peopling of Europe, and other sources.

"All truly Germanic tribes like Saxons, Jutes, Angles and Frisians, which settled in Britain, probably didn’t have R1a1 at all, as in regions of their settlement R1a1 level is below 2% now."Of course that is possible, but also possible is that there is no connection at all between the people who had lived in northern Germany and the UK. And that the people in the UK with mostly R1b had been there longer than only two thousands years. I think the last is more sound.

"Slavs originated between the Dnieper, Pripet, and Buh rivers in modern day Ukraine before there spread into many areas of Europe they inhabit today. Part of the proof for this are the river names in this region. This theory has been proposed by Jean Manco in her Peopling of Europe, and other sources."

This is possible.

But its also proven by actual DNA checked corpses, that there had been R1a1 people in East Germany, 4600 years ago. That R1a1 haplotype has its closest matches in modern day North-Poland and in parts of North Russia.

Those R1a1 belonged to the "Corded Ware" (some call it "Battle Axe people") culture. Wich some connect to the R1a1 presence in Scandinavia (others say, R1a in Scandinavia is even older than that) and the myth about the Asir side of the Norse religion. While the scandinavian natives may have believed in the Vanir gods.

Then, when finaly the head of the Asir pantheon (a warrior god) merried the head of the Vanir one (A mother goddess, fitting agriculturalists), both Religions got united as did the people. (or so, is guessed)

The Legend that made 1930 people believe in the Corded Ware origin of Wodan:

(Warchief Wodan came from As(i)a land to Saxland (Vikingterm for "Germany"), where is sons established several kingdoms. Himself went on to Nordland (Scandinavia).

The Legend is however from medieval age. But who knows, maybe it has older roots.

Map of the extent of the corded ware culture:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Corded_Ware_culture.png

And the Lichtenstein found is, as mentioned above, more or less a proof of tribes with I2b2, R1a1 and R1b all living together, as early as 3000 years ago.

Alinei's theory is not even wrong.If Indo-European languages would have been spoken by paleolithic times in Europe how to explain that they are so connected to Indo-Iranian and also the widespread presence of Semitic+Khattic+Sumerian loanwords as well as many other incompatibilities,shortcomings&anachronisms.Satem languages origin should be India(as the origin place of R1a and R1a1a)as for centum languages it should be Anatolia(R1b)and PIE origin would be a region between the 2(such as western Iran)and those languages diffused with humans from southern latitudes repopulating Europe after LGM Germanic is closely related to Tocharian rather then to Celtic and Italic.The languages spoken by paleolithic would most likely be very divergent and should be searched in the non IE Iberian-Aquitanian-Raethian-Pelasgian-Tartessian-Vasconic-Pelasgian-North Europe Substrat languages.

I didn't understand Alinei's theory like you, but in the meaning that Indo-Europeans were present in Europe before than many are thinking. I have always supported that R1b came from the Italian Refugium after the Younger Dryas, that IE is linked to Etruscan-Rhaetian-Camun and the contact with Ugrians happened in what is now East Europe.

Old Blog Archive

Dienekes' Anthropology blog is dedicated to human population genetics, physical anthropology, archaeology, and history.

You are free to reuse any of the materials of this blog for non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute them to Dienekes Pontikos and provide a link to either the individual blog entry or to Dienekes Anthropology Blog.

Feel free to send e-mail to Dienekes Pontikos, or follow @dienekesp on Twitter.